(Santa Ana CA, May 22, 2017) – While the two dismissal rule is unfortunately employed by patent and copyright infringers as a strategy to avoid a fair trial on the merits, blatant misuse of Rule 41 may move a court to deny application of the two dismissal rule. See Two Strikes and You’re ‘Out!’ – FRCP 41 & Copyright Trolls at DieTrollDie.com (accessed Nov. 8, 2017). Moreover, it may also place an infringer in the unfavorable position of trying a case before a judge who views its...

November 1, 2017

(Washington D.C., May 22, 2017) – Today the Supreme Court issued its TC Heartland ruling. The case, TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC was summarized by many in the media as significantly impacting venue, but ultimately cannot impact much at all. The question spoke to 28 U.S. Code § 1400(b), which says:
(b) Any civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of...

May 23, 2017

(February 14, 2017 – Marshall, Texas) – A jury has found Google liable for $20M in damages for infringing all claims of three anti-malware patents in their Chrome web browser.
In Alfonso Cioffi et al v. Google, Inc., 2:13-cv-0103-JRG-RSP, engineers Allen Rozman and Alfonso Cioffi, both Texans, created the technology to keep internet users safe and were deemed the inventors of such by the federal Patent and Trademark Office. When Google began using it, they were forced to sue to maintain...

February 15, 2017

(December 15, 2016 – Marin County, California) – Is filing a transfer motion worth it? A company’s backyard doesn’t seem like the fairest place to have a trial when the damage occurred in a another state, but that’s what happened here. However, the people in California found Apple infringed the asserted patents, the way it would have happened in Texas. Critics say E.D. Texas juries award too much, but really they just understand property rights better than most. Most people...

December 15, 2016

(Tyler, Texas – October 4, 2016) – VirnetX won again against Apple. A jury calculated that technology giant Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) owes more than $302 million in royalties to Nevada-based VirnetX Holding Corp. (NYSE: VHC) for infringing internet security patents owned by VirnetX. Jurors in the Tyler, Texas, courtroom of Judge Robert W. Schroeder III delivered the verdict in favor of VirnetX on Sept. 30 after one week of trial. The case is VirnetX Inc., et al. v. Apple Inc.,...

October 4, 2016

(Tyler, Texas – February 26, 2016) A jury unanimously handed down a $15.7 million verdict against Samsung in Rembrandt Wireless Technologies LP v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al, TXED 2:13-cv-00213.
The case involved two Bluetooth technologies owned by Rembrandt, US Patent Numbers 8,023,580 and 8,457,228, both of which were found “infringed” and “not invalid” by the jury. Reviewing the verdict, Judge Gilstrap found that the verdict was reasonable and...

February 26, 2016

(Tyler, Texas – February 9, 2016) A jury handed down a $7 million verdict against Samsung on Friday, finding they willfully infringed various patents owned by Imperium IP Holdings.
A finding of willfulness notably allows the Judge to increase the fine, up to triple.
The case involved US Patent Numbers 6,271,884 and 6,836,290, both technologies for improving the quality of photos. The jury disagreed with Samsung’s contention that the patents were obvious, awarding Imperium $4.8...

February 10, 2016

(Tyler, Texas – February 6, 2016) Judge Roy Payne today sent down a recommendation in Gonzalez v. InfoStream Group et al. (TXED 2:14-cv-00906-JRG, Docket No. 60) that producing “digital labels” is patent eligible under §101. He thus denied defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on those grounds.
A granting of a Motion for Summary Judgment is what the public sometimes refers as the case being “thrown out.” These Motions for Summary Judgment argue that...

February 6, 2016

(Tyler, Texas – February 3, 2016) It’s an infinite loop, alright. After successfully overturning a $368 million judgment in which Apple was found guilty of infringement, a jury revisited the case and found Apple to have been willful in their infringement and to have continued unabated since the earlier verdict. They reinstated and “enhanced” the damages, now $625 million, in in Apple vs. VirnetX, TXED 6:12-cv-00855-RWS.
The patents in question, each belonging to...

February 3, 2016

(Tyler, Texas – January 20, 2016) After a successful defense, Judge Gilstrap today granted Apple’s Bill of Costs in the amount of $420,000. This came two months to the day after a jury verdict denying Plaintiff ContentGuard’s contentions in the Eastern District of Texas’s case 2:13-cv-1112.
ContentGuard was represented by a team 17-deep from McKool Smith, including Samuel Baxter, Robert Cote, David Dehoney, Craig Donahue, Holly Engelmann, Shahar Harel, Seth Hasenour,...

January 20, 2016

(Tyler, Texas – Tuesday, October 13, 2015) Federal Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas denied an attempt by Chinese smartphone maker ZTE to have a $32 million judgement against them overturned and a new trial initiated. Judge Gilstrap said the jury did their job appropriately and effectively and were properly instructed on the law.
After deliberating less than 45 minutes, Jurors unanimously found in June that ZTE infringed all five asserted data entry claims,...

October 13, 2015

(Tyler, Texas – Monday, October 12, 2015, Columbus Day) A federal jury decided that Apple’s iPhones and iPads infringe on a University of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation patent, central to the devices’ A7, A8, and A8X processors. Judge William M. Conley said that Apple’s licensing fees and other damages could total as much as 862 million dollars.
Apple’s stock has fallen close to 2% since the announcement. Overall AAPL has fallen 18% in the last...

January 12, 2015

(Tyler, Texas – Friday, September 24, 2014) Judge Roy Payne of the Eastern District of Texas denied Google Inc.’s Motion to Transfer a patent infringement case against them to Northern California. “The Court is significantly concerned that Google is not being fully candid,” wrote Judge Payne. He further agreed Tuesday with the Rockstar Consortium LP that Google’s motion represented “cherry picking prior art witnesses,” that “non-party...

July 22, 2014

(Tyler, Texas – Friday, June 20, 2014) An East Texas federal jury returned a verdict against Defendant Texas Instruments Incorporated in a patent litigation case in the amount of $3 million. 6:11-cv-491-MHS-JDL, Dkt. No. 413. Paintiff U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC filed suit for patent infringement of U.S. Patent Number 5,434,872 – “Apparatus for automatic initiation of data transmission” and two other patents which were removed from the case prior to trial.
While the...

June 20, 2014

Redskins primary logo 1972-1981, 1983-present (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
(Arlington, Virginia — Wednesday, June 18, 2014) The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) determined this week that the name of the NFL’s Washington Redskins is “disparaging to Native Americans”; as a result the PTO canceled the Redskins trademark. Under a hail of increased political and social pressure over the past months, the Redskins have been fighting a turning tide to keep their team name.
Five...

June 6, 2014

(Washington, D.C. – Monday, May 5, 2014) The Federal Circuit determined that Plaintiff PersonalWeb Technologies LLC’s case against Microsoft Corp. for violation of certain patents should stay in the Eastern District of Texas. PersonalWeb commenced its action against Microsoft, Facebook, Apple, and others in September 2012. Microsoft later filed a motion to transfer the case to its home court in Washington. Chief Judge Leonard Davis denied the motion to transfer to preserve judicial...

May 5, 2014

(Washington, D.C. – Wednesday, April 23, 2014) Defendant Groupon Inc. filed a writ of mandamus to transfer its case from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiff, Blue Calypso Inc., commenced the action in its home state of Texas and more specifically the Eastern District of Texas. Blue Calypso accused Groupon of infringing five of its patents by operating a computer-based advertising service to registered users within an advertisers geographical...

April 23, 2014

(Alexandria, VA – Friday, April 18, 2014) Recently, attorneys at an American Bar Association Intellectual Property Law Conference ran amuck, fear-mongering about the Patent Trial and Review Board (PTAB). Attorneys, legal bloggers, and others around the country are and have been claiming that Inter Partes Review has proven to be more popular and more effective at invalidating patents than anyone originally expected. The current rumored figure is that 95% of patent claims brought before the...

April 18, 2014

(April 7, 2014 – San Francisco, California): Shareholders—represented by Lee Voss—have sued as individuals the CEO Sehat Sutardja, his wife, and the board of Marvell Technology Group Ltd. for failure to license a patent which Marvell knowingly infringed. In 2012 a Pennsylvania jury entered a verdict for the inventor of the patent in the amount of $1.17 billion. The Honorable Nora Barry Fischer affirmed the jury’s verdict which was increased in March by $366 million bringing the total...

April 9, 2014

Photo by opensourceway / CC BY-SA
(Wednesday, March 19, 2014 – Marshall, Texas):
Cognitec Systems GmbH, based in Dresden, has been ordered to reproduce unredacted versions of its jurisdictional discovery.
Initially, Cognitec Systems GmbH produced a set of heavily-redacted documents and justified the redactions by citing, among other reasons, European discovery limitations. However, after a Rule CV-26(e) “hotline” hearing with Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne, Cognitec Systems GmbH was...

April 1, 2014

(Marshall, Texas – Wednesday, March 19, 2014) – In SimpleAir, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., et al., 2:13-cv-416-JRG, an East Texas jury entered a damages verdict against Google Inc. for $85,000,000 for patent infringement. Many of the defendants, including Microsoft, chose to settle. Google, however, proceeded to trial, and on January 18, 2014 an East Texas jury entered a verdict against Google finding that it infringed two patents (7,035,914 and 6,021,433) and that the two patents were valid....

March 19, 2014

(Alexandria, VA – Wednesday, February 12, 2014) The Patent Trial and Appeal Board refused to apply Apple, Inc’s reading of the one year time limitation on inter partes review. See 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). Virnetx, Inc. and Science Application International Corporation commenced patent infringement actions against Apple, Inc. in 2010 and 2012 for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,502,135 in the Eastern District of Texas. During the 2010 litigation, an Eastern District of Texas jury found the...

February 12, 2014

(Federal Courthouse in Marshall, Texas. Photo by Jay Carriker.)
(Marshall, Texas – Monday, February 10, 2014) The Honorable Rodney Gilstrap entered an order for entry of partial judgment for patent infringement today against Google in SimpleAir, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., et al., 2:11-cv-416-JRG. On January 18, 2014, an East Texas jury found Google guilty of patent infringement but could not reach a decision on the amount of damages. Google’s counsel responded by moving the Court for a new...

February 10, 2014

(Thursday, January 23, 2014 – Tyler, Texas) Counsel for the Australian government’s science agency—Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)—squared off with Counsel for Cisco Systems, Inc. during a final pre-trial conference before Chief Judge Leonard Davis.
CSIRO’s pioneering patent combines several existing technologies in a unique way to create the wireless LAN technology underlying the IEEE 802.11 a, g and n standards, often referred to as Wi-Fi. To...

January 23, 2014

(Marshall, Texas – Tuesday, January 18, 2014) Earlier today, a jury returned a verdict against Google Inc. for patent infringement in SimpleAir, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., et al., 2:11-cv-416-JRG. SimpleAir commenced this action on September 15, 2011 for infringement of two patents: 7,035,914 and 6,021,433 both titled “System and Method for Transmission of Data.” Initially, Microsoft and Google were both parties to this action; Microsoft settled with SimpleAir and entered into a licensing...

January 18, 2014

(Monday, December 16, 2013 – Marshall, Texas) While Congress debates the reformation of patent litigation, U.S. Circuit Judge William C. Bryson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is back, riding the circuit in the Eastern District of Texas. See Order on U.S. Cir. Judge Bryson, Dec. 16, 2013. Chief Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Court has approved the intercircuit assignment. The general purpose of intercircuit appointments is to ease heavily burdened dockets. See...